Subscribe to this blog

Subscribe by email

Climate Change: 5 simple and macro ways to overcome it

People consume less:1 - Everybody consume less.
I'm not sure that the carbon emissions of a coal mine miner in China and even the emissions of a French people earning the French minimum wage are so bad for the planet, but we can all do something for the planet consuming less:
Smaller cars, less travel, less meat, smaller and more expensive houses, more expensive clothes.2 - Top consumers and companies consume less.
The good old Pareto law applies there. A pool of companies is responsible for most carbon emissions and a pool of rich people responsible of most of carbon emissions.

We can force rich people and rich companies to act with a classic weapon: tax! and maybe incentives (to make them renovate buildings, use sustainable energy sources, choose clean, light and less powerful cars, etc.)

Fewer people consume:
Yes, it's Malthusianism.
Please don't think I want to kill other people. I just say people must have fewer kids.3 - We can force people to make fewer kids.
See China (I know, they just stopped forcing people having only 1 kid to boost growth...).4 - We can educate them. to make fewer kids.
People educated do fewer kids. It's easy to identify heavy kid makers and spend tons on money on education.

We consume things producing less pollution.
Politics and media love it. It's call decarbonisation.5 - In a nutshell, we consume the same, growth rate is the same, stock prices are the same, our system is the same BUT, GDP units necessitate fewer carbon emissions.
So far, solar, wind and water-based energy sources are not sufficient. to replace oil and gas. Only nuclear can really help at scale and it will last dozens of years before facing new challenges. Inputs about it. You can also read Jancovici.
Issue: it does not work.
A) Even with ambitious decarbonisation targets, if we do not lower growth, we'll beat the 2-degree objective.
B) Nuclear rely on stuff you find underground: Uranium. And guess what it's not unlimited. Our nuclear plant will quickly face a Uranium shortage if we rely nearly only on it. We should improve our nuclear technologies. And as a bonus: find a way to secure plants and handle nuclear waste.

So what do we want?What do you prefer? 1, 2, 3, 4, 5?A bit of everything?Let me know! Seriously, I'd love to know.

Personally....
I don't believe in 1. I do it personally, but I don't think I represent the majority. People are programmed to get richer and our society programmed to sell more stuff to more people. To change that, we need to focus on something else than GDP.
I like a LOT 2 but don't see how it could be done with our current system where companies and rich people finance lawmakers. I count on NGOs and supra-national organizations to make governments agree on something #COP21
I like 3, but it's very touchy. 1 kid per couple for me is ok. For a lot of people, it's not... Even if it's possible,
4: I don't know. Hans Rosling may know Africa is an example where development happens, but the demographic transition does not happen. But it's very long term.
5 It's a mandatory one. We have to clean our energy production. I don't see how we can avoid nuclear, but I'd love to be wrong.